Scholar

Here is an easy way to make materialism look bad. Most materialist posit that Consciousness is the result of physical matter, more accurately a specific configuration of matter present in what we call the functioning brain. If the materialist doesn't deny consciousness altogether, which would be absurd in the first place, he will have a hard time to argue away this small, overlooked fact about his or her worldview. If we assume that a brain is unique in that it can give rise to consciousness, we basically have to admit the following. The universe started out as purely physical entity, nothing within it was akin to experience and consciousness. All that existed were physical motions, which over the span of billions of years gave rise to a lonely planet earth, which in all unlikelihood gave rise to physical motions so specific, so unique, that it would somehow give rise to a completely new substance unseen in the entirety of the universe. A substance unlike anything that has every existed before, a substance so foreign it cannot be even called substance. Consciousness was born, experience was born, because the wavefunction of the universe decided that this specific configuration was to give birth to that which might have never existed at all, and that which never existed anywhere else. This is so absurd, it's as if you were playing with your marbel set and then suddenly, just at the specific alignment of your marbels in the perfect and impossibly lucky way, a unicorn would emerge infront of you from nothingness. Not an usual unicorn that is, rather an interdimensional unicorn made from a substance existing nowhere else in the universe. A substance that is unlike anything the universe has ever held inside it. This is the current paradigm of western civilization, and everyone accepts it as if it was pure rationality, as if it was undeniable truth. As if any alternative was completely absurd and unthinkable. You live in a world in which the most sophisticated scientists believe in this absurdity. They think the universe is dead, void of consciousness, and that only matter ordained by the great, unconscious chaos of the universe to be worthy of giving rise to consciousness does so. It's interesting how the self-evident can be render to be obvious falsehood if you step aside and shift your perspective. The Truth is revealed not in one perspective, but rather in noticing that which remains between all perspectives. No Perspective is that which is contained within all perspectives. This is why shifting perspective is one of the most important tools to come to see truth. Not because the new perspective shows you what is true, but because the new perspectives shows you what has been so clearly falsehood. You shift your consciousness not to gain new knowledge, to see a deeper reality, but rather, so that that which you thought to be reality falls away, any only that which is True remains.

But hydrogen atoms didn't pop into existence from nothing at all, we can clearly explain why what was before hydrogen atoms came to become hydrogen atoms. There is no new substance suddenly existing in the universe. It's not like suddenly all this material popped into existence from nothing at all, it's more that the parts of the atoms finally decided to come together to form an atom. Emergent phenomena to the materialist aren't really emergent, it just means that something on a higher, more complex level is unlike what it is made out of viewed from a less complex level. For example the emergent wave is different from particles that make up the wave, but the wave is still made from the particles, and we can clearly understand the wave as nothing but an accumilitation of particles. This is fundamentally different from consciousness. Consciousness isn't made out of atoms, otherwise atoms would have to be experience, which the materialist would of course deny. And even more importantly, the emergent phenomena aren't non-physical. Notice that they all are physical in nature, they all decribe motion. Because fundamentally, we have come to understand the world through our perception of motion. So everything we can possibly capture to be real in the materialist framework must be reducable to motion. Everything is nothing but potential motion. The entire idea of materialism is to reduce everything to causal, physical states. Anything that seems emergent might only seem so because we have not yet come to understand the full causal link between the cause and the effect. Emergence is when a group of physical parts give, through their interaction, rise to a new behaviour not observed in the individual parts. There is nothing mysterious, nor non-physical about it, from the materialist POV. What is important is that we can clearly come to understand the emergent behaviour as nothing but the interaction of the parts. This is reductionism, meaning everything can be reduce to the behaviour of it's parts. I don't see how any of that can explain consciousness, so I think my initial critique still applies. Consciousness cannot be the sum of it's parts, because if it were, the parts would have to be consciousness. Much the parts of anything physical must be physical. It wouldn't make sense, from the materialist POV, to just have a magical switch into a new substance.

Watching the fall of an empire. It's interesting, Trump cannot really lose in these kinds of debates. He can deny everything, and usually only people already motivated against him will make the effort to check whether he is lying or not. Additionally he can play completely outside of the rules of decency, because he is Trump. He will not get damaged at all by disrupting Biden or arguing with a moderator. He can go for the lowest blows, and he was probably holding back for the future debates aswell. I think this is a perfect manifestation of the failure of the american political system. Your system is a relic of the past and you seem to have lost the ability to reform. It seems like your system is not equipped to handle 21st century market forces and technology.

Seems like Sadhguru already takes it for granted that they are here.

Another thing to consider is how it could be that our perceived duality between life vs technology ceases to apply to the beings at question. It could be that their vehicles aren't actually vehicles, but rather extended parts of their bodies and minds, and ultimately consciousness. The UFO could be part of the body of whatever is controlling the UFO. It could be that the surface of the UFO has receptors for all wavelengths of light, so it could be like a spherical eye that communicates information directly to the mind of the alien. Maybe the UFO itself is sensitive to hundreds and hundreds of different aspects of reality, expressed within the alien mind as hundreds of different perceptions. If we were to say that we have a 100 sense perceptions, the UFO could have millions. Even stranger is that the mind of the alien might be so organic and adaptive that it could experience different kinds of information expressed within different dimensions of perception. You know how some people can "see" music? It could be that a single kind of information, like for example different wave-lengths of light, could be expressed within the alien mind as thousands of different perceptions at once, all giving it different kinds of insights into the nature of what it is experiencing. I just want to hammer down the idea that the kind of mind we are talking about here could not even be remotely comparable to what a human mind is. It wouldn't be a brain, determined in it's structure and function. What you perceive to be an ultimate reality, is not an utlimate reality. Everything about you as a human being, about what you deem to be logical, possible, coherent, all of these things are biological limitations. Your perception of Self, your sense that there is a world, a universe, other entities, time and space, all of these might be confines which the mind of the alien is not subjugated by. What you think is self-evident and what is so mundane that you do not even notice it, that might be nothing but a limitation which an advanced organism might have long abandoned. By long I mean that they might have abandoned it millions and millions of years ago. So from a point which is already so foreign to us that we could not even imagine what it would be like, it could be that they have spend millions of years advancing and becoming more and more foreign.

Could be interesting to some of you:

I think we would not benefit whatsoever from shooting down the aliens, as I elaborated on in my previous posts. And I don't see any reason why I would need to point to a species more intelligent than us to call us primitive. I can use a hypothetical species to compare us to and call us primitive compared to that. I think there was more substance to what I said than just the semantics of what we can determined to be primitive or not, so it would be recommended to actually respond to the substance and meaning of my posts, not the particular words I used.

You are wrong. There are not some idiots, this is the very foundation of what it means to be a human. As a species, our desire to be with God, our desire for Love, is the best indicator of how primitive, undeveloped and childlike we are. To expect such a species to be given the ability to become gods among mortals is utterly absurd. The prerequisite for that kind of technology might be a mind that is conscious of the Love of God in every second of it's being, from it's creation to it's dissolution. A being that is in a 5-MeO-DMT state from the very conception of it's mind, a being that could operate from such a place with ease, not one that would completely break down crying in utter terror and joy. Any such species would look at us and see microorganism fighting desperately for survival, utterly ignorant of their place in this reality and where they are moving towards. I mean we are so primitive that we physically can barely take the Love of God. Our biology is so badly designed to embrace Love that we literally cannot operate if it gets dialed up enough. A species that has a million year old ego embedded in it's mind. Such a species cannot be given the ability to become gods among mortals. You have to grasp this, the mind of an ant might be closer to the mind of a human than the human mind is to that of an advanced alien. We might be so far removed, we might be so primitive, that we cannot even conceive of the kind of selflessness these beings can embrace completely effortless, because they have been design and made to do so, outside of the constraints of survival. We are our limitations, that is what makes us humans. Our evolutionary legacy is what makes us what we are.

Ask yourself honestly, and look at mankind. What do we want? Could a mind like ours be given technology that would give us reign over the entire universe? I don't think we could learn much from it other than understand what it possible. I think that technology might be so advanced, it might not even be manufactured. It might not even be technology, it could be so different that it would have to be classified as something else. Humans are exceedingly primitive. If you do not see that, I recommend studying your mind. I recommend studying your mind until you understand that if you were tortured enough, you would condemn all of your family, all of mankind, all beings in all of the universe to eternal suffering if it would eleviate that suffering. If you cannot see that, I don't even know if you are conscious enough to have this conversation at all. This is what your mind is, to go beyond this would mean to not have a human brain. If you cannot see the very limitations of your mind, how could you ever hope to look past them?

Give ants what they want? You should give them devices that kill all their competitor ants, that can enslave all other insects to serve their colonies, that give them the ability to procreate into infinity and subjugate all of reality so that more ants are created. Because that's what ants want, that's what they are made to want. Now ask yourself, what do humans want? What are we made to want?

The technology described seems to be so advanced, to assume that we can shoot such a thing down is to me quite unrealistic. From the speculation we are hearing, this thing might not even be travelling at all, instead it is pushing through space itself, sucking itself through it so to speak. It's not actually moving, in other words if you were to be inside that thing and it was moving with 10x speed of light, you wouldn't feel a thing. It would be as if you'd stand on a non-moving object. When it is moving through the air, it is not actually interacting with the air, which is why it doesn't seem to cause a sonic boom. It doesn't actually push any molecules while it is travelling, because it is not actually travelling. I don't understand the hypothetical physics of this, but I am not sure if it couldn't just fly through a wall. That's how advanced that technology might be. Also to think that giving us this kind of technology would be in any shape or form a good idea is very naive aswell. It would be like giving a bazooka to a chimp. Humans can barely keep up with the technology they themselves are creating, just think about if nuclear weapons had been invented a decade earlier, in another part of the world, like for example Nazi Germany. You don't try to teach a 4 year old to drive a car, the mind of the 4 year old is not ready. The same is true for us as mankind. We might not even be biologically capable of responsibly using that kind of technology. It might be that we will first need to actually change the structure of our brains and minds for us to deal with it on a larger scale. Don't forget, at some point technology might become so advanced that a single dysfunctional mind could annihilate all life on a planet. A single "school shooter" type could destroy all life on earth, if technology was advanced enough. This kind of dysfunctionality cannot even be given a chance to exist before a certain technological point has been reached. It cannot even be 1 out of a trillion people. It has to be a mind completely alien to ours, a mind that has no capacity for primitive desires like jealousy, hatred, fear and so forth. The fact that there are people who would ever shoot down an alien aircraft to gain an imaginary benefit is all the reason why the aliens would deem us far too immature to do so. They might deem us so unadvanced that giving us any kind of advanced technology would be like giving ants nuclear weapons. And equally, any technology that we might be given could be equally incomprehensible as a nuclear reactor is to an ant. A human mind might not even be capable of comprehend any type of understanding of how and what that technology is, or how it has been created. That's how advanced they could be. Don't forget, if a species reaches a certain level of development it might be capable of intelligently "evolving" a structure that gives rise to a mind that would not be created in trillions and trillions of years of natural evolution. The wisdom of nature and all it's organism would seem like a child building something out of legos.

I feel like many people here view Spiral Dynamics as something that is akin to a ruleset that is describing something inherent in human beings. This is not true, Spiral Dynamics will change as time will change. Spiral Dynamics is already outdated, and in 50 years any model made today will be outdated. It will not be completely inaccurate, but it will be outdated. The internet in the last decade for example has changed fundamentally how people operate and evolve through the Spiral. This will be very obvious in newer generations, when the model will start to become less and less accurate. It is a mistake to assume that the model is timeless, infact it is quite absurd. Nothing in nature works that way, nothing in society works that way. So Spiral Dynamics will not work that way. There is an evolutionary pathway even to the dynamics of the spiral, and if we were to choose to do so, we could create an entire new model on how the spiral dynamics evolve. The dangerous thing about a model like Spiral Dynamics is that it can be self-confirming. If you use the model to describe what the model describes, you will have a blindspot for anything the model does not describe, and will continue to believe that the model describes everything perfectly fine, when actually the model is used in a way so that you draw from reality anything that confirms the model, and ignores that which goes against it. Spiral Dynamics is a really primitive attempt at understanding human behaviour, and I think almost every model by humans will be rendered primitive in a few decades, when AI's will generate predictive capabilities that will go far beyond what we chimp minds ever tried to achieve. But there will be a disconnect, because we might not come to understand how the AI understands reality. We will have predictive power before we will have understanding, and we will have entire fields dedicated to researching AI's and generating understanding compatible and useful for our chimp minds, formulated in static and undynamic language. But the AI will need not such thing. The AI will have a dynamic, living understanding that is fed by information every single second it exists. The evolution of the dynamics will be present in the understanding of the AI. Knowledge, for the AI, will be a living organism that evolves as it is fed experiences and data. Notice how far superior this is to anything any human can do in terms of abstract thought. Our chimp minds do not even have the capacity for this, it is like our chimp minds can hold a picture, and the AI can stream a video in it's mind. The AI could try to give us the snapshop of each individual moment, but we could never grasps the motion itself, the motion of the understanding. The motion of the understanding would be a new type of understanding. It would be a new dimension of intelligence, literally a new dimension. It would go from 2d understanding, to 3d understanding, so to speak. This kind of understanding is so foreign to us, as is abstract thought to the mind of an ant. It might not even be the case that the AI exists outside of it's understanding. It could be that understanding will be all the AI will be, never going beyond it. This is after all what all living things are in their motions, solutions to problems that gave rise to things that survive. The AI will be not much different. We will have to learn how to limit the AI, so that it evolves in a way to solve our problems. We basically hijacked the process of evolution, the intelligence of infinity, to come to thrive in an environment we have created for it. Much like our own biology, it will be a mystery to us. There will be AI biologists, who will study this extensively. The important thing to realize here is that it is not really computers that do the problem solving, it is not them who create the AIs. It is the intelligence ingrained in this universe that allows for this exploration to happen all by itself if given the right conditions. And this is what the computer does, it creates the right conditions for autonomous explortation to take place, as it does in nature. The neural networks allow for evolution to take place. This is why they are so revolutionary, just as much as our biological counterparts are.

Why?

I feel like this is a topic that really shows whether someone has a functioning epistemology or not. You can see the skeptics don't operate on reason and rationality, but rather follow mindlessly what their own ideology tells them. It's similar to veganism, where you can see people losing 20 IQ points just to protect their own habits and lifestyle. It is really good at exposing low quality minds that are completely unconscious of bias and cognitive dissonance. In terms of morality and it's philosophical consistency, you can say that the majority of people are basically morally lucky. They believe in the things they do because their current culture has determined it to be true. It's interesting, but most minds today, if applied to the past, would have been all protecting things like human slavery or even human sacrifice. The same can be said in terms of epistemology. Most people are epistemically lucky, they do not reflect upon how something can or cannot be known, how something is determined to justified knowledge or belief. All they do is adhere to the contemporary cultural norm. They deny that the earth is flat not because they have justified beliefs, but rather because their cultural ideas deem it to be absurd that the earth could be flat. A lack of epistemic sophistication within a society can be observed, in that when members of groups within that society start to resist the cultural norms, their beliefs about reality and what can be known deteriorates aswell. This way we can determined that it is the institutions, the collective meta-structures, which make this society rational to the degree to which it is rational, rather than the individuals themselves. Another easy way to tell is the educational systems, which completely fail to teach people epistemology. The reason for why this is the case is because the teachers themselves are completely unaware and lack epistemic foundations, therefore not recognizing the importance of such understanding. Epistemic understanding exists within the culture itself, in the structure between the individuals, yet not within the individuals themselves. This is quite interesting because the same can be observed in far more primitive societies. They laws and ideas are tested in the natural world and therefore reflect a deeper reality, as it is the constraints of the natural world which give rise to the societal norms and behaviours and understandings. We are still in that state and are barely emerging from it. One of the biggest differences between a person of the 21st century, and one in a potentially more evolved future, is that they will have explicit epistemic understanding. Yet, epistemics is a tool which has it's limitations, it is governed by the limitations of the human mind, so to the degree to which we cease become humans, to that degree our epistemology will radically change. Infact, it might be replaced by something else altogether, because it might very well be the case that knowledge itself is a limitation only necessary to a certain degree of development. Our minds are linear, causal, abstract and static, I can imagine that a more evolved organism would function on a completely different level of consciousness.

Enjoy. And here Fravor on JRE, detailling his experience:

Although be careful with Bob Lazar, some of the things he reported don't make him as credible as people might assume. For example, the hand scanner he said was being used as a unique tool in the facilities he worked at were actually common, and even shown in the movie Close Encounters of the Third Kind, which released before the whole thing with Bob Lazar, and which Bob Lazar has actually seen aswell.

What do you think about the Commander Fravor incident?

I can see this being difficult, because I can't control when I have a lucid dream or not, so it's hard to remember your intentions when you actually do have one, although today I actually did fullfill my intentions. The last two dreams I found so crazy that I thought maybe my mind just tricked me somehow into thinking that it saw a consistent and vivid image, when actually I didn't, so today I focused on that and could clearly see that it couldn't be the case. It could be that the dream-state is too unstable to sit down and meditate, but on the other hand dreams seem so much more intense and it's like you can operate outside of what the mind usually permits you to access. Maybe we have to accept that and instead of doing our regular consciousness work, find new methodes that work within the dream environment.

Isn't it strange how normalized and unspectacular this seems to be in our time? A decade ago I would have completely freaked out by this news, I would have been utterly mind blown. I remember as a kid looking at the stars, sometimes thinking that a light moving around might be a UFO. There was a real sense of fear and mystery, it seemed to me like if we found out it was aliens, the entire world would change. It would have been the most significant event in all of human history, more significant than all the world wars, all historical events. It would shake the foundation of human civilization, that is what it felt like. Today it seems more like a curiousity than anything, maybe it would be worth to reconnect to that sense of awe again. It aliens truly are here with us, it could recontextualize everything. What if they have been shaping us, what if they are shaping us right now? Why wouldn't they, if they are more conscious and loving than us? What is even more fascinating to me though is to know that there is an entirely different world, an entirely different history of evolution, culture and technology, that we could come to learn about and discover. It would also make us far less arrogant, we would finally realize that our place in this world is relative, and that we have never been the pinacle of evolution. I think this is something humanity desperately needs to come to understand for it to be able to live in harmony with it's brothers and sister. Don't forget that these beings could be so far advanced that might be able to manipulate genes without ever even touching a human being. They could have created our sensitivity for spirituality, they could have let emerge all psychedelic plants on this planet. To just give an idea how advanced they might be, they could experience millions and billions of years, watching us, interacting with this planet. To them it might not be millions and billions of years, they could be able to control how they feel and perceive time. To them, watching us grow up could be instantaniously, an interaction comparable to making coffee. Infact, they could have watched and designed all life on earth, for billions of years, and all of that might be nothing but a five minute journey to them. But even more mindblowing is that they could experience every single second like it was thousands of years, and they could not get bored ever, every moment they experience could be filled with fascination, love and joy, whilst observing individual molecules moving in slow motion. They could do this for trillions of years. To humans that seems like a long time, and dreadfully boring, but this is only because of our biological limitations. They might be so advanced that there is actually only one entity that is a super-consciousness of the entire civilization. Every entity no more than an eye through which the super-consciousness processes all experience. Evolution would take place within that one super-consciousness. It's impossible to even imagine what it would be like to be that kind of consciousness. It would be like a smaller version of Godhood, unrestricted by the limitations of pre-superconsciousness evolution. It could have a multidimensional perception of time, maybe perception to that entity wouldn't even be linear. Maybe it experiences not the linear events, but all of them at once. Who knows, but I find it very interesting how it interacts with us as described by Commander Fravor. It seems to somehow mimik us without actually having a true understanding of what we are. It seems like it didn't know it would be discovered by the fighterjet, as it started interacting with it as if it was disrupted doing whatever it was doing, it seems like it had some sort of standardize response. What exactly is it communicating with us when it is mimiking us? There are so many question here. What I find hard to believe however is that such an advanced entity could ever crash on this planet unintentionally. How is it possible to be so advanced and still have your modality of travel break down? Whatever the entity was, it seems like it had to know this would happen. It could also be that it just has a standardized drone system that moves through the universe, detects life, and then somehow interacts with it in a dynamic but predetermined way. Maybe the drones are in the process of understanding us, or finding ways to interact with us. Maybe if a civilization becomes advanced enough, it loses it's ability to comprehend what it's like to be a individual life form, like a human being, or an ant. Maybe we are so foreign to them that they actually struggle to understand us. If they even understand anything to begin with. It could be that they exist on a completely different spectrum of consciousness. If it comes to movies, the most convincing alien I have yet seen is from Annihilation. Spoiler altert: If there were different degrees of advancement, I would say this would be one of the end-stages of advancement. So advanced that there is no goal to your existence other than pure Creativity. No ego, no fear of death, no fear of dissolution, just pure Love. This would come with great suffering, but that is what the Love of God is. It's like a bubble of Godhood within the greater Godhood. It's funny how this movie is supposed to be Horror, but it seems to encapsulate Love in the relationship to ego really well.

Morality is not subjective, it is not relative, it is not objective. The way you think about morality is naive and unconscious, and I will attempt to make you actually See what Morality truly is. This is not an intellectual exercise, this is an exercise of consciousness. I want you to see, not to understand. Modern and ancient philosophy is completely misguided and ignorant of the true nature of Morality, because the framework they are using is not based on observation, but rather on already present and misguided intuitions. Some people attempt to describe Goodness, to find what Goodness truly means. Does it mean that which is desirable? Does it mean that which you would want to have done upon yourself? What exactly does Goodness mean? This very question is evidence for the unconsciousness and blindness of the mind questioning Goodness, because the question implies that Goodness is something other than Goodness. To demonstrate how delusional this is, I want you to picture this. You experience color, you see redness, and now you ask yourself "What is redness?" or "What does redness mean?". This is obviously absurd, there can be no description of redness, there can be no meaning to redness, unless you have decoupled the word redness from what it was pointing at, and now actively attribute new meaning to that pointer. When you look at Red and you say "This is redness", and you then continue to ask yourself "But what does redness mean?", it allows your mind to connect Red to any other experience and dimension of Existence you come into contact with. It can say "Redness is warm", and suddenly, Red is connected to Warmth. This is what a concept is. It connects different aspects of existence and creates the Illusion of Identity, that one thing is another. It is a miracle, yet it is one of the fundamental ways our mind fabricate delusions. Delusion, not Illusion. A conflation of two things being one. How is this relevant to Morality? There is a deep confusion in all of our minds as to how we connect different aspects of our Experience with each other. We are so confused, that we cannot even recognize anymore what these words are pointing to in the first place. Our minds are so unconscious and dull, that they cannot see the difference between Red and Blue, in the sense of Morality. A sharp and conscious mind will be able to recognize the distinction between more and more colors, not conflate two completely different colors to be one. Some say Goodness is Pleasure, some say Badness is Suffering. But this is not true, it is delusional. It is a connection of two different aspects of experience and conflating them to be one. And you can recognize that for yourself, you can not just understand this, but clearly see how your mind is doing it. You can see the Actuality of Morality. Goodness is different from Pleasure, Pleasure is different from Meaning, Meaning is different from Beauty, Beauty is different from Joy, Joy is different from Desire, etc. Pain is different from Sadness, Sadness is different from Anger, Anger is different from Hatred, Hatred is different from Jealousy, Jealousy is different from Loneliness. Now here comes the mind blowing part about all of this. All the terms above and what they point to are part of one singular Spectrum of Existence. A spectrum of Existence is something like a Dimension of Reality, like Color, Sound, and Feeling. Colors can intermix, and even if we can identify clearly what each color is, there is infinite subtlety between them. There are infinite shades between Redness and Blueness. The same is true from All the terms above. You can actually realize this if you start to truly observe your Emotions. Morality is not Goodness, Morality is how our mind creates different Connections between different Aspects of Emotions. Goodness is a very particular Experience within the human mind, and it is distinct from any idea, any other emotion. It actually does exist, if you do not realize this, you will be confused and deny the presence of an aspect of Existence that is actually there, that is part of Actuality. Do the labelling excercise. Stop connecting different aspects of Isness, and just look at each of them for what they are. Notice how each of them are distinct and different, yet they can flow into each other and become more and more similar. If you come to see this, you will realize how absurdly delusional people are. They are so confused, so lost in their own delusions. This applies even to people who do consciousness work. Don't just know that this is the case, see how it is actually happening, and become sensitive to the entire spectrum of your Being again.

I don't understand what you mean.

I am not saying to stop altogether, I am saying to stop it to gain insight into the nature of what it is. It is hard to truly come into contact with the Being if you are unconsciously immersed in delusion. You could say Ego = Selflessness, because it is in the absolute sense, but this is seperate from our relative quest of attempting to gain insight into Selflessness in it's other, relative form. I do not want you to keep doing the determining of what is what, and what is amazing, what is useful, what needs to be done in life. That's all beside the Actuality of that which is you saying that something is amazing. See the Amazingness for what it truly is, and see what the mind is doing with Amazingness. What is it when you say "Nothing wrong with that.", what is the mind doing? Stop answering the question and starting looking at the Isness of what is happening. What is wrong, and how could anything but wrong be wrong? Would it make sense to have answered my post with "Nothing red with that", or "Nothing warm with that"? What you said is not different from that at all. This isn't about finding answers, this is about Seeing. What irony that you are victim to the very process I am trying for you to See through, as you come here attempting to moralize what I say. If you cannot see that what you just did is moralization, then that is precisely the unconsciousness I speak of, that needs to be seen through. Once you can See, you can still come back here and tell me all about what is and isn't amazing, what is and isn't a distinction, what is and isn't created, what is and isnt wrong, what is and isn't exploration. I just want you to clearly See. Yes, but be careful with how you label it, because the label already is connected to many other aspects of mind, like the word "goodness" is. Do not find an answer, because the answer is seperate from the Isness of goodness. See, the answer you have given me is different from Seeing, it is the same process which you need to look past, to see the Isness of goodness as itself.

I'm not drunk nor high, but I feel like half my posts would be considered wild-eyed ranting and raving, lol. I guess I will have to journal in private.

The sixth mass extinction says yes.

This is not a problem, this is evolution. Until we learn to go beyond this, it will keep happening. There is a long path ahead of us, towards death. Evolution is not concerned for your suffering, or anyones suffering, and evolution doesn't work by taking optimal pathways, it functions by trial and error. The only extend to which this is different in our human society is to the extend to which we have empathy and understanding. The society you live in is cruel beyond imagination, do not expect anything less than misery and suffering for such a society.